[opendtv] Re: Bob likes COFDM

  • From: Bob Miller <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:50:56 -0500

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

>At 10:19 PM -0500 3/19/05, Tom Barry wrote:
>  
>
>>Congress is occasionally making noises about shutting off analog TV and
>>selling the resulting spectrum out from under the American public.  It
>>would seem that to do that and keep their jobs they should ensure there
>>is a sufficient replacement available.
>>    
>>
>
>I am no fan of spectrum auctions, but I find it difficult to conclude 
>that auctioning the spectrum for other uses than "Free TV" is selling 
>out from under the American public.
>
>If that is the logical conclusion that you draw, then I would suggest 
>that the sellout occurred many decades ago, when the government 
>allowed TV and radio licenses to be sold, creating a commercial 
>market in the TV and radio spectrum. Today there are billions and 
>billions in stockholder equity (and private investment) in radio and 
>TV stations; most of this equity is the goodwill or "estimated book 
>value" of the spectrum associated with those licenses.
>
>I would suggest that the American public was sold out a long long 
>time ago, with respect to radio and TV broadcasting. We have nearly 
>$50 billion in annual revenues being directly generated from these 
>licenses, and even larger secondary markets that are driven by 
>broadcasters - i.e. music, TV program syndication, and indirectly the 
>Movie industry, which relies on the TV industry for promotion. What 
>other industries get free use of a public resource, paying only 
>minimal fees to the regulating agency.
>
>Do we give the timber industry the trees in our State and National 
>forests? No. they lease these resources providing a large revenue 
>stream to governments.
>
>Do we give the energy industry the oil, coal and natural gas that is 
>located under our public lands? No. They pay leases for the use of 
>these resources to governments.
>
>Who is to say what the best use is of a scarce public resource?
>
>Is entertaining (and occasionally informing) a small fraction of U.S. 
>homes (20% or less), is better use of the spectrum than improving the 
>public safety communications and the wireless telephone services that 
>are used by about 2/3's of Americans?
>
>Would the public benefit more from a wireless service that offered 
>free (or very cheap) broadband connections to the masses?
>
>Perhaps the sufficient replacement for NTSC might be a service that 
>the vast majority of A
>
>  
>
>>So again I ask, is indoor reception a criteria for analog turnoff?
>>Inquiring voters will want to know.
>>    
>>
>
>
>The marketplace defines the terms of engagement.
>
>With Cable you plug a TV in and it works.
>
>With DBS after you properly install the Dish, it works.
>
>For TV broadcasters the part that is not working is the business 
>model, not the existing transmission infrastructure,  or the one 
>intended to replace it.
>
>Even if 8-VSB worked perfectly with rabbit ears,  we would not see 
>many homes drop their multi-channel TV services. IT is not a question 
>of whether the technology works, it is a question of the content 
>offer not being competitive.
>  
>
Chicken and egg argument. If the technology worked the content would be 
offered.

The reverse is not true however. That is if the content was offered the 
technology would work.

And I suggest that will be soon tested if and when a decent receiver is 
available. It will only take one venture using any modulation that works 
and the US will follow the UK with an explosive rebirth of OTA.

Bob Miller

>That being said, broadcasters cannot be competitive - even if they offer 
>exactly the same content as cable and DBS - if the transmission 
>infrastructure and receivers do not support an easy plug & play alternative to 
>the competitors.
>
>But one must also consider the potential competitive advantages that the 
>broadcaster could bring to bear if they decide to compete. Both 
>cable and DBS are essentially fixed services, although it is fairly easy to 
>set up a motor home to receive a DBS service when the vehicle 
>is parked. Broadcasters have the opportunity to differentiate their service by 
>delivering bits to things that are moving or portable.
>  
>
True but the UK proves that success is possible even when mobile is not 
part of the equation. Yes you can receive mobile in the UK now with 
diversity receivers but that was not true nor advertised during the 
current boom in fixed reception of COFDM. So a decent 8-VSB receiver 
could duplicate the UK. Remember that there are more free channels in 
many US markets than Freeview offers free program channels (30). If 
broadcasters got together and multicasted with MPEG4 they would offer 
far more channels than the wildly successful and Murdock threatening 
Freeview.


>So if you design the terrestrial broadcast network to support the more 
>demanding cases of mobility and portability, I suspect that 
>reliable reception in fixed locations using simple antennas should be a piece 
>of cake.
>  
>
Obvious and true.

Bob Miller



>Regards
>

 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: